Tags lmao

[Rodg88]

update pass on tags

https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/topic/137633-syntax-for-11-part-tagging/?do=findComment&comment=2529080

Remove 'function synonyms'/less directly applicable names for functions.
Use ( or { for family names, or [ if the tag is the start of the family name, and ] for number designations

above should allow searching mar 2/mariner 2/mariner2 to match mariner 2 parts.

combined no-space name searches like mariner2 or mariner6 will just always match too many parts thanks to squad's autotags, matching sizes like 0.625 or 1.25

maybe some end-matching will allow atlasV to exclude other atlas parts.

Maybe add the specific launchers to specific payloads? might get messy? so searching for explorer would show the juno 1 parts?

individual stage designations would be good too, eg (saturn ?2 ?ii or ]2 ]ii

probably not combing multi-family upper stages with launcher families, but possibly more specific launch vehicles and satellites could share tags, eg building juno 1 would include sergeants, tho maybe redstone wouldn't.

shared upper stages could have a suffix tag to allow "atlas-centaur" to show both, with ]taur

double check scidefs and add matching tags

keep cryo/hydrogen/lfo/monoprop

{sizem / {1.875m should allow the m to be optional, maybe a prefix to allow bulkhead profile? like s1.5 for 1.875

end user docs for usage/special tags

seems like the part name also gets added as tags

[JacobB094]

Specific launchers when searching for payloads are probably a bad idea. If searching for Explorer, you want Explorer parts, not a bunch of launch vehicles mingled with them. Remember that in stock, searched parts show up in alphabetical order. VABOrganizer is neat, but even when it does mature, we should not rely on it to keep things orderly.

[JacobB094]

The 2.5m PLF base for Delta III is erroneously marked as a 1.825m part.